After a successful Sundance, the film now seems to have no public release date.

The 37.5 percent of you who said you would watch the upcoming Steve Jobs biopic Jobs (formerly called jOBS) will have to wait a little longer, as the studio has decided it wants to spend more time marketing the film. That's according to insiders who spoke to The Hollywood Reporter, who claim Open Road Films has decided to delay release from its original target of April 19. A new date has not yet been set.

Open Road Films announced in January that it would debut the film, which focuses on key moments in Jobs' life from 1971 to around 2000, in late April following a successful Sundance premiere. Yes, this is the film where Jobs is played by Ashton Kutcher, and Steve Wozniak is played by actor Josh Gad. The buzz for this particular film has been stronger than most others about Apple or tech history, though the film has not gone without criticism as well. Wozniak (now famously) panned the work by saying certain scenes were not quite accurate and that he would never have dressed the way they portrayed him in some scenes.

Kutcher and Gad addressed some of that criticism at Macworld\iWorld 2013. "[T]here will always be debates about what we got right and what we got wrong," Gad said on stage. "I really appreciate [Woz] and I hope that when he sees the movie in his entirety, he'll understand that we went to great lengths to capture the essence of his journey."

Aside from claims that the original release date is being pushed, there are no further details about Jobs. For those of you who said in our January poll that you would see the movie, are you still on board or has your enthusiasm waned?

Jacqui Cheng
Jacqui is an Editor at Large at Ars Technica, where she has spent the last eight years writing about Apple culture, gadgets, social networking, privacy, and more. Emailjacqui@arstechnica.com//Twitter@eJacqui

Last movie I saw in the theater I watched only because I was given a gift card. Spending $35+ with popcorn and drink (Edit: with my wife) isn't my idea of "entertainment", when I can wait a few months and rent it for $1 at RedBox.

(Disclaimer: I am an Apple fan)I will most definitely watch the movie, although I am sure it won't cover nearly what Jobs' biography covered. I just hope they portrayed the personalities of Jobs and Woz like the biography does.

If I were the producers... I'd aim for the "Jobs" movie release to be around the next major Apple product release. That's all kinds free mind-share marketing given all the hype that generally surrounds such events.

What can you say of a film about Jobs & Woz when of the two Woz is the only one still alive--but he wasn't consulted for the film, apparently...? He should be fairly insulted that someone sought to capture his "journey essence" without even talking to him...

I remember the old TV movie about Bill Gates that portrayed him as an evil, James Bond-type villain. It was absurd to the point of being ridiculous and got almost nothing right. I expect this will be more of the same kind of worship-cum-crucify rubbish.

If I were the producers... I'd aim for the "Jobs" movie release to be around the next major Apple product release. That's all kinds free mind-share marketing given all the hype that generally surrounds such events.

Yeah, good idea! IMO the perfect date would be on the anniversary of Jobs' passing, although if the acting sucks it could mean extreme thrashing from the Jobs following. Could be a really good thing, or a really bad thing.

What can you say of a film about Jobs & Woz when of the two Woz is the only one still alive--but he wasn't consulted for the film, apparently...? He should be fairly insulted that someone sought to capture his "journey essence" without even talking to him...

I remember the old TV movie about Bill Gates that portrayed him as an evil, James Bond-type villain. It was absurd to the point of being ridiculous and got almost nothing right. I expect this will be more of the same kind of worship-cum-crucify rubbish.

Are you talking about Pirates of Silicon Valley? Because that was both fairly accurate, even according to Gates himself, and didn't really portray Gates as a villain.

Perhaps I'm missing some level of deadpan irony here, but this article describes the extent of Wozniak's objections in far too mild a way. He described the script and the released clip as "awful and atrocious" and "not close...we never had such interaction and roles...I'm not even sure what it's getting at...personalities are very wrong although mine is closer..." That's way stronger and more pointed than a lukewarm "not quite accurate" and quibbling about whether or not he owned a tie.

I remember the old TV movie about Bill Gates that portrayed him as an evil, James Bond-type villain. It was absurd to the point of being ridiculous and got almost nothing right. I expect this will be more of the same kind of worship-cum-crucify rubbish.

Are you talking about Pirates of Silicon Valley? Because that was both fairly accurate, even according to Gates himself, and didn't really portray Gates as a villain.

I would have guessed Antitrust, in which Tim Robbins portrayed a scenery chewing evil villain named "Gary I'm-Not-Bill-Gates-So-Don't-Sue-Me Winston", CEO of giant software corporation "Moo-Cow Soft" (or some name like that.) It was a pretty transparent nod to MS, but so far out in the fiction section that it needed a map just to get back to the card catalogue.

I pre-ordered the collectors edition boxset dvd collection including special features such as "How Steve goes to the bathroom" and a life-sized model of his head to set on my desk at work. I wouldn't want to miss out on the opportunity to show how cool I am to my co-workers.

I'm not sure why it's screening at Sundance is referred to as "successful", other than I guess they got to the end of the movie without the projector eating it, or something. Feedback seemed mixed at best, and since most movies screened there are looking for distribution deals, this seems to be evidence it couldn't find one.

I think many people are missing the point as far as whether this is a good or bad movie.

For starters, I have great respect for The Great and Powerful Woz (as opposed to his former partner and the current iteration of the company they created), but many movies based on real life occurances often play fast and loose with the facts. If Woz doesn't like it because he considers it inaccurate he's certainly entitled to that opinion, but for most of the potential audience the accuracy of the film wouldn't be the most important part. The ultimate question is: Is it entertaining? Does it draw in the audience? If it fails to succeed in either of those then it doesn't really matter whether its accurate or not.

The other thing is that a lot of people here seem to think that any movie about Jobs would need to cater to people that were fans of his. This also misses the point. Do you have to like Walter White to enjoy "Breaking Bad?" I never cared for Jobs, but that doesn't preclude me watching a movie about him if the movie is interesting and entertaining. Not liking something is not the same as not being interested in it. I think Jobs and Apple are very interesting. But Jobs is interesting in a way that's possibly too cerebral for a movie and probably better suited to a book such as the Isaacson bio. I don't think either fans or detractors would deny that Jobs is interesting, but is he VISUALLY interesting? Are there enough episodes in his life that lend themselves to the big screen? I'm sure there's a few parts that would work well - the boardroom rants, for instance. But are there enough to hold interest throughout a feature-length film, especially for a general audience not entirely composed of the typical ARS readers? I somehow doubt it. And I'm sure that's the bigger problem.

But in true circular irony, better marketing may be just what this film needs. After all, if the marketing is good enough it wouldn't be the first time in history that excellent marketing made an otherwise mediocre product successful.